The Gospel of Judas

Question from Kim: Jesus, several people have asked about the newly published Gospel of
Judas. I know you have already commented on Judas twice, but I wonder if you have a comment
on the new gospel?
Answer from ascended master Jesus through Kim Michaels:
I consider the Gospel of Judas a part of the ongoing process of making modern Christians aware
that Christianity was much more diversified in the first couple of centuries and that much was
lost after the emergence of the orthodox church. However, I do not consider this gospel a major
milestone.
This gospel was one among many gospels that are often called Gnostic gospels by orthodox
Christians. It was indeed brought forth through a process of inspiration, revelation or what today
would be called channeling. The main purpose was to counteract the rising negativity toward
Judas and provide a counterpoint to the orthodox portrayal of Judas as the only reason I was
crucified. If you read the four official gospels carefully, you will see that I knew Judas was
playing a role, that I somewhat encouraged him but that I nevertheless would have been crucified
even if Judas had not betrayed me.
Thus, it is not necessary or reasonable to become so hateful toward Judas, and it is somewhat
ironic that some of the people who hate Judas the most are fundamentalist Christians. These
people seem to believe that if Judas had not given me up, I would not have been crucified, yet
they also believe that it was the spilling of my blood on the cross that has washed away their
sins. So if the crucifixion was necessary for their salvation, why blame Judas? Would they prefer
he had not betrayed me and thus they had not had their sins washed away?
In reality, the Gospel of Judas was meant to counteract this hatred of Judas because it prevented
many Christians from understanding the inner mysteries behind my crucifixion. Obviously, that
purpose was undermined when the Gospel of Judas was banned as heresy.
It is important to understand that this gospel is an example of what we might call an attempt to
balance the scales by providing a counterpoint to a popular opinion, interpretation or doctrine.
This is a principle you see in many spiritual teachings; indeed I made use of it in many of my
statements, where I challenged the scribes and Pharisees or Jewish customs. As I explain
throughout my website, LINK people tend to become rigid in their adherence to outer doctrines,
and thus one of the roles of the Living Christ is to challenge peoples fixed viewpoints their
graven images in an attempt to shock them out of their mental boxes. The purpose is to get
them to think by providing a viewpoint that is startlingly different from what they were brought
up to see as an infallible truth.
My point is that the Gospel of Judas should not be taken literally or seen as a factual account of
what actually happened. It is designed specifically as a counterpoint to the popular interpretation
of the official gospels and thus it is not meant to give factual knowledge. It is still very much in
the realm of duality in that it is a response to a dualistic viewpoint. For that matter, the official

gospels are not meant to be taken completely literally. Even they can be considered as countergospels in the sense that they aim as one of their functions at countering Jewish beliefs about
me. They are very much adapted to peoples beliefs and Old Testament scriptures in order to
show that I was a prophet in the line of Old Testament prophets and that I had come to bring the
Jewish religion to a new level.
When you avoid the trap of interpreting the Gospel of Judas literally, you can see that it is not
correct that Judas was my foremost disciple. He did think so at times, as did Peter and a couple
of the others. Yet I had no preferred or foremost disciple, affirming my oneness with all life.
However, I did have a special relationship with Mary Magdalene LINK as my twin flame, and
this is reflected in some of the official and unofficial gospels. Likewise, the official gospels are
correct in that Judas did commit suicide.
My point is that the Gospel of Judas should not be seen as an attempt to provide a factual
account, and thus it is not what is normally called a historical document and certainly not an eyewitness account. I am aware that some will say the official gospels are not historical accounts
and do not seek to provide a factual account. However, these gospels were written as an attempt
to provide a blend of factual accounts and stories aimed at producing an effect on a particular
audience. The Gospel of Judas is primarily given to provide an effect on the audience, namely to
counteract official interpretations. In other words, there is some historicity in the official
Gospels.
Take note that I am not thereby denouncing the Gospel of Judas as false or heretical. For those
who have grown up with the official hatred of Judas, this gospel can help them open their minds
and overcome the hatred, which is highly beneficial for their own growth. I am merely saying
that if you start taking this gospel literally, you will go far beyond its intended purposeas is the
case with any religious scripture.
As I said, this gospel was channeled to counter a popular misconception, and it is very difficult
for the channeler to receive such a teaching. It is quite easy for the recipient what scholars
call the author to take the teaching too far into the opposite extreme of the viewpoint it is
meant to counter. This did to some degree happen with the Gospel of Judas, so it is not entirely
pure. Nevertheless, this is relatively insignificant when you understand the gospels true purpose.
Incidentally, many modern spiritual teachings are also given as counter teachings. You will see
many of today's channeled teachings that do serve the purpose of countering either traditional
religious beliefs or a scientific world view. As such they can serve a function for people to
transition into a more spiritual frame of mind.
The problem is when people start taking them literally or think they come from the highest
source. As I have said elsewhere, many modern channelings come from the mental level, which
means they can counter the scientific and rational mindset. However, if you want to take such
teachings as factual, you will run into problems. My point being that at some point a sincere
spiritual seeker needs to start looking for teachings that originate from the ascended masters and
thus do not originate from the level of duality found in the three lower levels of the material

universe. We will also sometimes give counter teachings, but they will always point beyond
duality for those who have ears to hear.